Clearly, my own undergraduate education left me woefully unprepared, at least as far as Adorno goes. Although if you want to talk about Gadamer or Husserl, I'm your girl.
This does make things make more sense, although in my seminar it was asserted that the DE's main point was not only that the world we participate in can be analyzed through the lens of myth, but that all myths always-already contain the seed of their own destruction. What do you think?
Also, anytime you have a desire to post about Eco, please do. Because I honestly feel he gets short shrift, despite being among the few of his calibre to speak with any clarity. I have a tendency to value the works of theorists not only on their ideas but the quality of their prose, and Eco (and Cixous, and a few others) meet my standard of clarity. This may be because my head is naturally-muddled, but in a more political (ethical) sense, I also see jargon and obtuse language as yet another tool in policing borders, performing privilege, and re-enforcing the status quo in all its depravity/deprivation.
Thank you.
This does make things make more sense, although in my seminar it was asserted that the DE's main point was not only that the world we participate in can be analyzed through the lens of myth, but that all myths always-already contain the seed of their own destruction. What do you think?
Also, anytime you have a desire to post about Eco, please do. Because I honestly feel he gets short shrift, despite being among the few of his calibre to speak with any clarity. I have a tendency to value the works of theorists not only on their ideas but the quality of their prose, and Eco (and Cixous, and a few others) meet my standard of clarity. This may be because my head is naturally-muddled, but in a more political (ethical) sense, I also see jargon and obtuse language as yet another tool in policing borders, performing privilege, and re-enforcing the status quo in all its depravity/deprivation.